New submission from Attila Fazekas:
The following example function compiles to bytecode which contains,
an unnecessary JUMP_FORWARD 0 instruction:
def func():
if a: pass
Actual:
dis.dis(func)
2 0 LOAD_GLOBAL 0 (a)
3 POP_JUMP_IF_FALSE 9
6 JUMP_FORWARD 0 (to 9)
>> 9 LOAD_CONST 0 (None)
12 RETURN_VALUE
Expected:
dis.dis(func)
2 0 LOAD_GLOBAL 0 (a)
3 POP_JUMP_IF_FALSE 6
>> 6 LOAD_CONST 0 (None)
9 RETURN_VALUE
The above JUMP_FORWARD instruction increases the code size and also has a
negative performance effect.
I do not see any reason to have the extra NOP in the byte code in this case.
***
The attached patch removes this NOP generation from the code compilation part,
so it will take effect by default.
I had a little trouble when the code compiled from ast,
because the If.orelse had a different content. (NULL vs. zero sizes asdl_seq)
* The generated Assembly code updated in dis unit test.
* The compilation test updated to test a real 'if' by using a variable in the
condition. (The True and False is not a variable anymore)
----------
components: Interpreter Core
files: python_nop_ifelse.patch
keywords: patch
messages: 226547
nosy: Attila.Fazekas
priority: normal
severity: normal
status: open
title: Unnecessary JUMP_FORWARD(0) (NOP) in if statements without else or elif
type: performance
versions: Python 2.7, Python 3.1, Python 3.2, Python 3.3, Python 3.4, Python 3.5
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file36569/python_nop_ifelse.patch
_______________________________________
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.python.org/issue22358>
_______________________________________
_______________________________________________
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe:
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
